Split California into two or more states? Readers respond to our question

It’s an excellent idea to split California, as the inmates are running the asylum here. Leftists/liberals have political power within the current state borders and most conservatives are disenfranchised. Diversity seems to divide people, not unite them, and I would much rather live around like-minded people. Strong communities are built when people have the same values and traditions. When did that become a bad thing?

Being a smaller entity also means we will have more influence over officeholders — not less.

I have a couple of suggestions for the ballot measure: Please include Castaic in the Central Valley so we’re not included with liberal Los Angeles, and then rename Central California as Madison after the Founding Father of the U.S. Constitution. It will give us the much-needed separate identity as a “free” state.

— Nancy Tujetsch, Castaic

No: Areas need each other

What a dumb question! Northern California needs the tax money from the many millions of people in Southern California; Southern California needs the water from the many rivers in Northern California; and both North and South need the food grown in Central California.

We have a great opportunity to show the world how to live in harmony. All we need are leaders of integrity to accomplish this.

— Geri Brehm, Whittier

Here, bigger is not better

Splitting California into two states makes sense for may reasons. The state is too large and diverse to be effectively managed by one CEO.

There would be economic impact, and a star would have to be added to the U.S. flag. To solve this problem, ask the Dakotas to merge into one state. There is a solution for everything.

— Mark Hawkins, Long Beach

Advertisement

Don’t split the finest state

Absurd on its face. My dad was born in San Francisco and my mom in Los Angeles. California is the finest state in the union. We have a beautiful coastline, Yosemite and wonderful cities; a rich and diverse history, including the railroads and the movie industry, agriculture and aircraft.

Yes, we have serious issues, including unemployment, immigration, debt, education, the poor and homeless. But to break apart our wonderful state would serve only to add more elected windbags and do nothing to address the issues. We must stand united to make our state as good as we know it can be.

— Mary L. Dickinson, Alta Loma

A bid for political influence

When the Dakota Territory was granted statehood in 1889, Republican lawmakers split this sparsely populated area into two states — North and South Dakota — to gain four Republican senators instead of two. Those states are still sparsely populated. Each state has a population about equal to the city of San Francisco’s — around 800,000.

Splitting California into six parts would add 10 senators for the West Coast. Is that part of the plan? How many would be liberal Democrats? Would more rural areas add several conservative Republican senators?

The proposed states of West California and Silicon Valley would gerrymander liberal voters into a coastal strip, guaranteeing four liberal senators. Many proposed states already lean conservative, so their voters could increase the GOP power in the Senate by adding eight conservative California senators.

Like the Dakotas, the state of Jefferson would be overrepresented, with two conservative senators for a population like that of the city of San Francisco.

— James Clark, Torrance

Imagine the border battles

This state is huge, but carving up California into six different states seems crazy. While I think there would be consensus for dividing the state into two, maybe three at the very most, six is fraught with trouble.

Most important, who would be the individuals or group responsible for the dividing lines? That’s just as important as how many states this one state would be carved into.

— Tim Sabosky, Torrance

Beware of this NorCal idea

We should not divide California into six separate states. These proposals always come from people in the northern part of the state where the water is. They never come from people in the southern part where the water users are. Rather than improving state government, it would create five more bureaucracies to waste taxpayers’ money.

— Robert Murlin, Whittier

Six states are not enough

The proposed six-state solution is inadequate to solve California’s problems. It will take at least 12 to adequately separate the big spenders from the normal people. This would then open an opportunity to take some of the subdivision states out of the current California ranking as the worst state to do business in, with the highest tax rates, highest fuel prices and highest electricity rates.